Ron Paul’s Bill To Audit The Federal Reserve Now Has 92 Co-Sponsors

This is history in the making, and victory is within reach. Imagine what will happen if HR 1207, The Federal Reserve Transparency Act, comes up for vote in Congress! With more than 20% of Congress already co-sponsoring this bill, it has real potential to pass — BUT only if we educate and rally the people to support it and get our Congresspeople to put it to vote and pass it.

Step 1: Your Representative

If your representative is not on the following list of HR 1207 co-sponsors, call their offices, write to them, email them, etc. Let them know they need to support HR 1207. If you live in their district, let them know. Go to their office.

Step 2: Financial Services Committee

HR 1207 is now in the House Committee on Financial Services. This is THE MOST IMPORTANT STEP in this legislation! If it doesn’t get out of committee it will not come to a vote! There are 71 members on this committee and they are all listed below.

We need to let all members of the House Committee on Financial Services know that we want them to allow full House consideration of HR 1207 so it can move forward; we need them to support this. Now is the time.

Call their offices, write to them, email them, etc. Let them know they need to support HR 1207. If you live in their district, let them know. Go to their office.

Start with Barney Frank! His staff said that his office isn’t receiving a lot of calls about HR 1207… let’s change that!

Please co-sponsor and/or support H.R.1207, an effort to audit the Federal Reserve.

Recently, it has come to light that there is little to no accountability to the people on the part of the Federal Reserve. While the citizens of this country are required by law to give an accounting of every penny they come in contact with, the Federal Reserve has never been held to the same standard. During this time of extreme economic crisis, the people deserve an accounting of where our money is going.

Currently there are 92 co-sponsors for this legislation, and it is enjoying bi-partisan support. Your efforts in supporting this important legislation would go a long way in proving to your constituents that you not only hold the Federal Reserve to the same standard as you do your constituents, but it would also show that you believe in transparency. Anything less than support for this resolution suggests that you are in favor of secrecy and a lack of accountability to the people who pay the bills. We pay the tab; we have a right to know where our money is going.

Unlike recent bills that you voted in favor of that had hundreds of pages and just a few hours to read, this bill can be read in under 5 minutes. I encourage you to take the time to read it, and then move to support it.

Thank you in advance for your attention on this important legislation. I have every expectation that you will do right by your constituents and support this measure.

Sincerely,

Step 3: The People

Tell everyone you know about HR 1207 and ask them to support it and to contact their representative as well. Link to this page and to CampaignForLiberty.com.

This initiative is crucial and we need to redouble our efforts to get HR 1207 passed.

What happens if the bill passes and the audit doesn’t prove anything useful?

Well it could mean a couple things in my mind. First, that the Fed Reserve managed to cover their tracks or that something caused the audit to be ineffective. It could also mean the Fed Reserve really had nothing to hide (given the information we DO know this seems unlikely, however).

But regardless, what the Fed Reserve does with our money should be made public and transparent. At the very least we have the right to know that.

Like or Dislike:00

Sean

I think the real question would be… What would happen if we do find some sort of wrong doing?

Like or Dislike:00

Sean

are you going to set up a new federal reserve? are you going to let big banks take over? or are you going to nationalize the banks?

at the least, we will follow the law and prosecute whoever did wrong, but its hard to do that because all decisions are voted on and its not against the law to make financial transactions if they consider it to be an important factor.

Like or Dislike:00

Sean

The treasury pretty much told us what was going on after the g7 meeting last week. He said that we had been pumping money into the world bank so that other countries would buy goods from us.. Thats the whole idea of free trade… You can’t be for free trade and against the federal reserve, so I think this message you all have been following is a little blur.

Like or Dislike:00

Nate Y

Why do you think this? They ignore all types of laws as it is. It’s going to be up to the people to make sure the government respects our laws.

Tell me what you want nate.. do you want to set up a new federal reserve? or let big banks take over? or do you want to nationalize the banks?

Like or Dislike:00

Nate Y

None of those. I’ve already said what I would like to see happen. I would like to see the steps taken toward sound money and free banking in this country.

Like or Dislike:00

Sean

whos going to pay for free banking? what good does sound money do when you buy everything from overseas?

Like or Dislike:00

Nate Y

Who will pay for free (that is, free from government intervention/manipulation) banking ? Uhhh the same people who pay for any good/service…they’re called consumers.

What good does sound money do when you buy everything from overseas?

You touch on one of the main virtues of sound money without even realizing it. One good thing sound money does is it prevents you from running such monstrous trade deficits in the first place. But now we find ourself in a difficult position because we abandoned sound money. Just like the drunk finds himself in a difficult position because he abandoned sobriety. The answer certainly isn’t more alcohol (the increased deficits/inflation of the Gov/Fed). The solution is smaller government, decreased spending, no inflation, sound money, etc.

Another advantage of sound money is it makes raw materials very very cheap. Then you develop (in our case redevelop) a manufacturing sector, make new products from the raw materials, and sell to other people at a profit. As a result, you don’t have to buy everything from overseas.

Like or Dislike:00

Sean

shows your lack of knowledge about economics. if the dollar was worth more, we would run up higher trade deficits because foreign products would be cheaper. everyone would own a 60″ plasma and bmw. And you are wronggg again. Sound money makes our dollar worth more which makes our products more expensive. Other countries would buy goods from europe if we had a stronger dollar.

Like or Dislike:00

Sean

and i don’t know what you consider free banking. banks charge alot more than the fed does to lend money.

You obviously do not understand what sound money is. It is not simply a stronger fiat dollar in which everything else on the planet stays the same. If it was, then your points would be valid. Happily, that is not what sound money is and your arguments can safely be tossed aside.

But I must admit, i am confused. In other posts you said you want sound money. I guess now isn’t the right time?

Yeah, that is kinda what I am wondering. I mean, a lot of effort is going into this, so how do you ensure it is done correctly?

What is even going to be audited?

For example, is it to obtain the release of couterparty information? Is it to validate the accuracy of the information the Fed posts on its website? Is it to audit the accuracy of the balance sheet? I don’t want my tax dollars to be wasted on an inefficient audit that fails to define the spirit of the bill. I want an audit that quells concern about the Fed, or exposes issues, so how do you do that in a manner that provides resolution for this conversation?

The bill is very short and doesn’t have much for details, for better or worse I understand. Additionally, I am skeptical about the effectiveness of any ‘government audit’. Sarbanes-Oxley is a total joke, so if this is going to be done, it has to be done once and done right.

Any information or clarification to that end would be greatly appreciated.

Like or Dislike:00

Sean

I bet there is nothing really to expose except banking practices that none of us would understand. Every move they make will be justified one way or another.. It is not pratical that all the elected officals voted to give away this “trillion dollars” to some organization that the country would not benifit from.

Like or Dislike:00

Sean

and you make a good point.. what exactly is the congress going to do? the same congress that let corrupt bonuses fly through the legislation process without any prosecution.. They don’t have a clue what to do.

Like or Dislike:00

Nate Y

They wouldn’t have done it unless the country would benefit. Is that what you’re saying? If so, you’ve sealed that circle quite well. Of course, everyone here will see right through such nonsense.

Like or Dislike:00

Sean

You obviously didn’t read what i just wrote. I said that the federal reserve has been giving money to the world bank so other countries can buy products from us. Most people would say that it was well intentioned.

Like or Dislike:00

Nate Y

I don’t understand. You don’t want your tax dollars wasted on an an inefficinet audit. But you don’t mind many, many more of your tax dollars wasted by the Federal Reserve system? That makes no sense. It’s like saying “I don’t want Dave to steal 5 bucks from me. But if John steals $50,000 from me I don’t really care.”

Like or Dislike:00

Matt

No, I don’t want my tax dollars wasted anywhere, or at anytime, i would assume you agree.

I don’t need rhetoric, I am actually asking a question related to this bill, as I am legitimately interested in educating myself, I think it is an applicable question and I am seeking to get an answer. Please let me know if this is not the correct forum for how I can find details that this bill is trying to implement.

Like or Dislike:00

B T

Well I for one am no expert at auditing a financial institution, so I don’t believe I’m qualified to lay out a plan for one..

One thing you have to consider is that currently the law is written to exclude numerous transaction types that the Federal Reserve from being subject to audit by the GAO… As to how effective a full audit by them is, I really don’t know… So it’s a fair question to ask.

Like or Dislike:00

Nate Y

Of course you don’t need rhetoric. You provide plenty of it on your own.

Based on your questions, you seem to be a pretty sharp guy and you probably went to college. I am a little puzzled as to what document(s) you seek stating the details of the bill. Such documents do not exist. You’ve obviously read the bill. That’s as detailed as you are going to get. Your education is complete. What are your concerns? What would/wouldn’t or could/couldn’t be done according to the bill that is cause for concern?

Like or Dislike:00

Sean

No nate, your education is complete.

Like or Dislike:00

Nate Y

This is quite backwards. You’re implying I think I’m smart. This could not be farther from the truth. I do not suffer from the fatal conceit which plagues central bankers, government planners, and adherents to Keynesian economics. THEY are the ones who think they can accurately fix prices (set interest rates) and coordinate entire economies. Their arrogance is incredible. I merely have the good sense and am humble enough to realize they are attempting the impossible. And we’d be much better off if they stopped trying so hard.

Like or Dislike:00

Peter

HR 1207 is merely a stepping stone. Congressman Paul wishes to end the Fed entirely. And he is wisely taking baby steps with other members of Congress who are being pressured for more accountablity in Government spending.
The Fed has had the luxury of obscurity for decades. But it’s recent hyper activities have brought it squarely into the public spot light. Short of another 9/11-type of an attack or some other major distraction (Swine Flu Epidemic) there will be no going back now. The damage has already been done. Audit or no audit the public outrage will only worsen with every mistake that the Fed now makes.

As for as how to go about auditing the Fed,well,if HR 1207 is passed we will just have to wing it. Learn as you go. The risk of tax money being wasted on an inefficient audit can’t possibly compare to the waste of money that is taking place now. Wasn’t it the Fed that just informed us that approximately 20% of the current bail out monies could be lost to fraud? That’s a huge chunk of change. More than enough to cover the cost of an unprepared audit wouldn’t you say?

A mechanic simply cannot lay out in detail what it is that he’s going to repair or even give an estimate of the cost until he’s had the opportunity to at least open the hood of the car.

Congress could quickly pass some more bills giving even more protection and power to the Fed. But the Fed already has maximum powers and protection. Any more would require flat out removal of the Constitution. The media could try doing it’s part to distract the public but again short of another 9/11 I really don’t know or see how HR 1207 can be stopped. Again, if the Fed would lay low for awhile and quit making mistakes the attention may go away. But the Fed appears to be too restless and too impulsive to do so.
Right now The Fed is it’s own worse enemy.

Like or Dislike:00

Matt

Thing is though, if you are conducting an audit and don’t really have a plan as to what you are auditing, i can pretty much guarantee you that your audit is destined to fail – as you aren’t more capable than the party being audited. It would be like sending in a middle-school science team to audit the workings of the Manhattan project.

Which unfortunately would then have the exact opposite effect as to what the bill is intended to do.

Like or Dislike:00

Sean

actually nate, they tried to help us by keeping interest rates low and then the value of the dollar started to drop. If it was up to banks, the value of the dollar would have already been destoryed. And don’t say that we can switch to sound money, because sound money doesn’t work with large trade deficits. That is the reason why we got rid of sound money, because we couldn’t afford to buy oil overseas.

Like or Dislike:00

Sean

Matt, I believe if anything happens, we will find out that the M1 (money in circulation) is low because we spend so much overseas. Im sure this audit it will justify the bailouts and government spending.

Like or Dislike:00

John

Hi Matt,

What needs to be audited within the federal reserve is simple. They operate under a fractional reserve banking system. A .pdf file of the pamphlet entitled “modern money mechanics” can be found by using your preferred search engine. If you have an understanding of this pamphlet’s content, then you will inherenetly understand that the nature of this bill is only the beginning of a much larger problem we are soon to face.

1. Our entire economic structure is outlined within “modern money mechanics”, as it very well should be. It was printed by the federal reserve. Here is one excerpt from this pamphlet that reveals the truth about our economic engine.

” In the United States neither paper currency nor deposits have value as commodities. Intrinsically, a dollar bill is just a piece of paper, deposits merely book entries. Coins do have some intrinsic value as metal, but generally far less than their face value.
What, then, makes these instruments – checks, paper money, and coins – acceptable at face value in payment of all debts and for other monetary uses? Mainly, it is the confidence people have that they will be able to exchange such money for other financial assets and for real goods and services whenever they choose to do so.
Money, like anything else, derives its value from its scarcity in relation to its usefulness.” – “modern money mechanics, Federal Reserve, Chicago.

So with that being said, by the Federal Reserve, our money has no real value. It did have a gold standard value before the Federal Reserve came into existence.

2. Under the FAQ section posted on the Federal Reserve Board’s website. They define theirselves as follows. ” The Federal Reserve System is not “owned” by anyone and is not a private, profit-making institution. Instead, it is an independent entity within the government, having both public purposes and private aspects.

As the nation’s central bank, the Federal Reserve derives its authority from the U.S. Congress. It is considered an independent central bank because its decisions do not have to be ratified by the President or anyone else in the executive or legislative branch of government, it does not receive funding appropriated by Congress, and the terms of the members of the Board of Governors span multiple presidential and congressional terms. However, the Federal Reserve is subject to oversight by Congress, which periodically reviews its activities and can alter its responsibilities by statute. Also, the Federal Reserve must work within the framework of the overall objectives of economic and financial policy established by the government. Therefore, the Federal Reserve can be more accurately described as “independent within the government.” – http://www.federalreserveboard.gov/faqs

Now how can the Democratic process in America remain an effecitve governing instrument of the people of America if it is not truly soverign of influence. And what and who are these “Private” aspects within the federal reserve?

Their argument to this is that they seek to keep politics out of money. However, keeping politics out of money does not effectively keep money out of politics.

The last portion to the federal reserve that concerns me is the fact that they are not an elected entity that operates within our government. I dont know what your ideology is, but my political views will never accept such a power existing in my country that goes unelected. When Mr. Bernake told our congress that giving them fiscal information for review would be “counterproductive”. My response is this. Bullshit! The Fed has gone too far.

Only god can make something out of nothing.

Like or Dislike:00

Matt

And that is where I am getting conflicting information. I understand the nature of a Central Bank, as well as RP followers’ beliefs in not having one.

Is this bill trying to audit the fundamental philosophy of *having* a Central Bank, or will it be to audit our Federal Reserve System and how well it adheres to it’s stated purpose and responsibilities?

Those are two totally different things.

Like or Dislike:00

Sean

Well ron paul doesn’t believe in central economic planning and his followers believe that the federal reserve is corrupt, so there are mixed messages. But all of this is blurred anyways, its really vague if u ask me.

Like or Dislike:00

John

Hi Matt,

From what I gather and hope for is that this bill will do both.

If this bill passes and an audit is conducted of the federal reserve to disclose currently how well it adheres to it’s stated purpose and responsibilities than that will give our congress and our citizens with the accountability of which we are entitled.

I think the philosophy of having a central bank will be determined after a solid physical audit is conducted.

I’m not a Ron Paul follower, in fact, I’m not even a repbulican, but I do feel that this legislation is needed. My philosophy on this is simple. I’m confident that an audit will only give our country a small taste of an underlying truth that we will have to face as a country.

Like or Dislike:00

Nate Y

We don’t even need the audit to know that the Fed has failed in it’s mission for price stability. Prices are merely a reflection of the strength of the currency. The dollar is worth 3-4 cents compared to the dollar the Fed inherited. Which is another way of saying prices have shot through the roof. The Fed has failed.

Like or Dislike:00

Sean

you compare the dollar to other countries currencies to obtain the value. the last time i checked you could buy 10 double cheeseburgers for 10 dollars. thats price stability.

Like or Dislike:00

Nate Y

No. That is not how prices are measured. If one could buy 10 double cheeseburgers for 10 dollars today, one would have been able to buy those same 10 double cheeseburgers for 30-40 cents in 1913.

That is definitely NOT price stability.

Like or Dislike:00

Sean

im pretty sure you will be able to buy 10 cheeseburgers for 10 dollars your whole life. And i’m pretty sure that you have been able to buy cheeseburgers for a dollar your entire previous life, unless your like some 35 year old dude.

Like or Dislike:00

B T

Sean, the power of coining money was ennumerated to the Congress by our Constitution, and nowhere does it say the are free to hand it off to anyone else.

As far as central banking is concerned, the founders were against it because it goes against free markets. Earlier you said something about the central bank providing credit for people to buy our goods, but in a free market there is no need to incentivize people to buy any products. If they aren’t buying because the price is too high then the seller may have to reduce prices or risk his business failing. It could also be because they don’t want or need what we’re producing, so the market for that product doesn’t exist and we should allow the reallocation of resources to productive sectors, rather than prop them up and bail them out with other peoples money (taxpayer dollars that could be used much more productively if allowed to be reallocated into a market that actually exists).

Like or Dislike:00

Sean

we need people to buy our goods. In our “free market” we purchase hundreds of billions of dollars worth of oil a year.. The comparative advantage, or concept of free trade, is that we must export as much as we import. Either we export securities (government debt) or we export money so we can export goods.. Its either do this, or not drive cars.

Like or Dislike:00

Dave

Sean,
Suppose you have a lemonade stand and it costs you 10cents to make a glass of lemonade. Now you want to make big money and you think people will pay 1 dollar for your super special lemonade. Well if no one buys it, you have 2 choices: drop your price or close your door while absorbing your costs.

The law of supply and demand works this way. Companies develop technologies that they want to sell, but many times they cannot be done efficiently to a level that there is a large market for them. Look at LCD/Plasma TVs. The technology came out and the cost of $30k. As the production lines got more effecient the costs drove down and the prices lowered. The margins became leaner but the volume of sales drastically increased. Using the example of the lemonade, if you found that iced tea was half the cost and sold for the same as lemonade would you make that instead?

Your argument of government subsidies or sales of intrest to other countries to “help” has delayed the feasibility of alternate fuel technologies. If our gas costed us $9 a gallon 30 years ago, like Europe which is closer to the Middle East, we would have made SUVs the way we did in the early 90s? Again back to lemonade, if you got money from your mom to lower your costs by 9 cents and you could then lower your price below iced tea would you just keep selling lemonade? That is what we have gotten ourselves into.

Everytime the government interveigns in existing markets not only is it taking from productive areas and distributing to that market, it effectively is killing an emerging market. I think staying out is the best option.

Like or Dislike:00

Sean

you would see major inflation before that happened and everyones savings would become worthless. it is going to take 10 years for us to develop the technologies to get off fuel. maybe we just stalled that time frame and boosted the economy at the same time.. so now is the time to do exactly what we are doing. we are setting up a renewable resource power grid so we can run electric cars.

Like or Dislike:00

Matt

Hello Dave,

“Your argument of government subsidies or sales of intrest to other countries to “help” has delayed the feasibility of alternate fuel technologies. If our gas costed (sic) us $9 a gallon 30 years ago, like Europe which is closer to the Middle East, we would have made SUVs the way we did in the early 90s?”

As a free-market adherent aren’t you against the reallocation of resources via government involvement?

Why should the United States government discourage the building of SUV’s by raising tax rates on petrol? Conversely, if US tax rates are less than European counterparts, aren’t SUV’s then more of a product of free market enterprise than tiny little fuel-efficient cars?

Look at tax rates for some of those countries you mention, compare it with ours, and let me know why you support extreme govt involvement in one aspect of central planning (energy in europe) and not another (finance in the US).

Petrol Tax Rates
Germany: approximately USD 6.28 per US gallon
Netherlands: The 2007 fuel tax was € 0.684 per litre or $ 3.5 per gallon. On top of that is 19% VAT over the entire fuel price, making the Dutch taxes one of the highest in the world
Norway: Even though Norway is the third largest oil exporter, the fuel is heavily taxed.
United Kingdom: approximately USD$3.49 per US gallon

Like or Dislike:00

Dave

Well I carefully was trying to dodge the issue of taxes on gas, and I will do so again by jumping to the main part of what I was driving at.

The key issue is that government has stepped in at the corporate level to help subsidize many of these companies. Furthermore, they are now sponsoring them because they could not/ did not diversify their portfolio in advance of oil going up.

By stepping in any fashion they effectively helped develop the waste that existed which help the companies along. Additionally, government involvement in helping the buy and sale of oil (which was later repealled which oil prices went up) before reaching the market assisted in driving oil prices up which then impacted the auto makers.

It’s one of those things that the gov’t has been in so many aspects of the entire market that only a complete divestment would solve the issue. My previous example was to simplify the multitude of simple arguements that Sean makes with little to no justification, logic or explaination.

Like or Dislike:00

B T

I can’t exactly see what you’re trying to say here. It’s pretty simple, if you need someone to buy your goods, then maybe try producing goods that the people need or want to buy. We don’t need a central bank or central economic planner to tell us what we want to buy. The same is true in foreign markets, produce something they need or want, and trade it to them for the goods YOU want. You make it sound like all we can produce here is debt (although as of late that is what has been driving our economy…). If we got back to actually producing goods with value instead of simply consuming while paying for it with debt, we’d be a lot better off.

Like or Dislike:00

Sean

Your correct, if we actually produced more goods, than we we would be alot better off. But free trade makes foreign goods cheaper, so we purchase from them because everybody wants cheaper products.. Central banks don’t tell us what to produce or purchase, they just allow businesses to borrow money so they can choose on their own what to purchase and produce according to the market.

Like or Dislike:00

Nate Y

Your first sentence makes sense. The rest of it is gibberish.

How can you not see that having a Central bank with these capabilities is a tremendous intervention into the market? The Central Bank, armed with a fiat currency, distorts the market and creates unsustainable misallocations of capital. It’s possible to fool most of the people for a while and run enormous trade deficits but eventually it catches up to you. The market starts to self-correct. There’s nothing the government/fed can do about it other than drag it out, postpone it, and prolong the pain. And that is exactly what they’re doing.

Like or Dislike:00

Sean

banks don’t have the capital to lend to people. It is rare to find a bank that lends off of savings. how are you going to have an economic system with no loans. most loans are created through fractional reserve banking. money has to be created. We’ve grown twice the size since we got off the gold standard. There just isn’t enough out there. Banks have to allocate money.

Like or Dislike:00

Nate Y

There would still be loans even if we had full reserve banking and sound money. Seriously dude, you claim to be acquainted with Austrian economic theory but all of your questions suggest you haven’t read a single page.

Are you talking about population growth? If so, that’s entirely irrelevant. Why? Again, because prices adjust.

If you mean we’ve grown economically. Yes, but it was mostly an illusion. Like the dude who gets a few credit cards with $50,000 limits, the US has borrowed and spent itself into a giant financial/economic disaster. Time to shape up.

Like or Dislike:00

Sean

there are different opinions on deflation. You dont know what inflation is so i dont expect you to know what deflation is.

Like or Dislike:00

Nate Y

Again, very disingenous of you. You previously stated you would start using the proper definition of inflation. That is, the expansion in the supply of money/credit. Deflation, is the opposite. That is, a contraction in the supply of money/credit. Get your definitions straight.

But let’s say deflation is merely (as the misguided economists and media pundits say) a general fall in prices. This is not a bad thing. Of course it happens during debt obliterations like we are experincing now and the government/central banks should let it happen. But it is also a natural consequence of a productive economy anchored by sound money.

Like or Dislike:00

Sean

plain and simple.. When deflation happens, jobs become lost because there isn’t enough spending, unemployment rises and new businesses are not created to start new jobs because there is not enough spending.. Wheather deflation comes from contracting the money supply, or just less productivity in the economy, its creates a market freeze.

Like or Dislike:00

Kevin

As much as I like Ron Paul. Progressives control everything, so this is a useless adventure.

Like or Dislike:00

Willis

I asked my Rep. Ginny Brown-Waite (R-FL) to support Dr. Paul’s Bill.
Here’s what I got in reply:

Thank you for bringing your concerns to my attention. I appreciate the time you took to contact my office on this important issue and welcome the opportunity to respond.

As you know, the recent bailouts of the financial industry, the auto industry, and the twin efforts to stimulate the economy have cost trillions of dollars. As I am sure you also know, the federal government was operating at a substantial loss before these expenditures. Those trillions must come from somewhere. If spending is not curtailed, or revenues are not increased, there are really only two ways the government can finance its deficit: First, the Department of Treasury can issue debt to investors around the world. Second, the Federal Reserve can “print money” and put it into circulation.

Congress places a cap on how much debt the Treasury can issue, but it does not place a cap on how much money the Federal Reserve can “print”. This is the main source of concern for critics of the Fed and increasingly investors as well. From August of 2008 to December of 2008, the Federal Reserve doubled the “monetary base”, or the amount of money under its direct control. The Federal Reserve was designed to be as independent of politics as possible. The reason is simple: good politics doesn’t necessarily equal good economic policy. The Obama “stimulus” plan, for instance, is a prime example of that.

Yet despite this need for independence, it is important that Congress keep a close eye on the big picture, both in terms of economic security, and the relative power that this small groups of people has. Some critics argue that opening the Fed’s books for public inspection would accomplish these goals. There is a concern, however, that revealing which banks are borrowing from the Fed on a short-term basis, or how much they are borrowing, would create uncertainty about those banks’ health, and could create or spread a panic. There is legitimacy to those concerns, and Congress should approach the subject in a sober and deliberate way.

Throughout my tenure in public service, I have always kept an open door and an open dialogue with my constituents. As Congress addresses the many challenges facing our nation, I hope you will continue to share your thoughts and views with me. Accordingly, I encourage you to visit my Web site at http://brown-waite.house.gov to email me and find useful information about our 5th Congressional District.

It is my honor and privilege to serve the people of Florida’s 5th Congressional District and my offices and staff are here to provide you with any assistance you may need.

Sincerely,

Ginny Brown-Waite
Member of Congress

I guess this means she won’t be supporting it?

She seems to be afraid it would cause a run on the banks?

( No surprise there, she has a history of not caring about Americans, I asked her to support American Engineers by opposing expanding H1-B visas and she told me how wonderful H1B’s were.)

Like or Dislike:00

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com ExposetheFraud

Expose that fraud and keep on her ass like white rice!!!!! Get them all sponsoring it, even Waite, sounds like another 100 year old incumbent.

Like or Dislike:00

Jack

Makes me feel good inside that so many people are aware of whats going on in this country.

If it werent for Ron Paul supporters and the like, I bet Whatever theyve been planning for us wouldve taken place soon after 9/11.

I am glad this bought us some time and pray this bill passes and shows everyone how corrupt the FED is.

But I think everyone should ask themselves… What do you guys think theyre going to do to stop this bill from passing? Or if it does pass then what will happen to them?

If you guys are as serious as i think you all are about this (and you all do seem to be), then a good tip might be to start thinking ahead of time about what their likely reactions to this are going to be.

I love what RP is doing here. This is absolutely the most perfect thing to do right about now. The reason why this is is getting bi-partisan support is because it just makes too much sense.

RP has a way of getting this kind of mixed support on things. I think it’s because he is thinking of ways to actually improving government, and the people know it. It’s simplistic and right and even those outside of Washington politics can understand get behind it.

The two major parties just control only, that’s why we are here. Hi, we are here! On the verge of economic collapse!

I think it makes way too much sense to put in check the power that government entities have. Don’t you think? Hmmmmmm…

There must a lot of vascilating gutless wonders in Congress trying to have an each way bet.They have been comfortable sucking off the excesses of the present status quo,knowing full well that they have betrayed the real system that gives them sustainence,yet they will betray their own chldren’s future for a few pieces of sliver.

The banksters have preyed upon our lust for money and short term gratification,and most of us have fallen for it,thus becoming their debt slaves.Those in power in the near future have to face a real possibility of violent revolution,whereby anarchy will see their destruction also.

Will the rest of Congress rise above their foibles and see the dawning of a new age of enlightenment and liberty?

AUDIT THE FED NOW WITH NO PARAMETERS THAT PERMIT ESCAPE VIA EQUIVOCATION!

The main point of the article is that the DTCC hold in trust nearly all shares traded.Legally they own them and not the buyer.So if the US Govt falters,then they could just sell the shares they have in trust and keep the money.

Like or Dislike:00

Ross

Who are the DTCC? The Depsitory Trust and Clearing Corporation.They have $23 trillion in assets and in 2002 turned over $ 917 trillion.99% of all share transactions in the US go through them and they are owned by the same people who own the Federal Reserve. See Ming the Mechanic “The Unknown $20 trillion company” http:ming.tv/flemming2.php/__show_article/_a000010_000923.htm

Like or Dislike:00

Darrell

I just want to thank Ron Paul for his leadership to Audit the so called Federal Reserve. A bunch of ultra rich bankers who suck us dry. Don’t get me wrong I’m fine for folks that work hard and make big bucks, but The behavior of the Fake Fed is a crime.

11:52 am: "Yes I know brother that he ran as a republican, it is sad enought that he not can run as an LIBERTARIAN. I truly hope he’s gonna run again. We can only support him..." - knowitall

Subscribe to our Newsletter

Enter your email address in the box below and click "Subscribe!"

Links

Disclaimer

RonPaul.com is maintained by independent grassroots supporters of Ron Paul. Neither this website nor the articles, posts, videos or photos appearing on it are paid for, approved, endorsed or reviewed by Ron Paul or his staff.

Support RonPaul.com

All donations go towards maintaining and expanding the RonPaul.com fansite.